On Tuesday 07 February 2006 1:35 pm, Stephen Street wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-02-07 at 08:03 +0000, Russell King wrote:
> > > @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static int spi_suspend(struct device *de
> > > int value;
> > > struct spi_driver *drv = to_spi_driver(dev->driver);
> > >
> > > - if (!drv->suspend)
> > > + if (!drv || !drv->suspend)
> >
> > Shouldn't this be dev->driver ? If dev->driver is NULL, drv may be
> > non-NULL due to an offset in the structure.
> >
> If I understand your comment correctly, the implementation of to_spi_drv
> protects against this by returning NULL if dev->driver is NULL. This is
> implementation dependent
I'd say that to_spi_driver() is defined that way, specifically
to avoid that class of nasty bug.
> and I can make the test explicit if you want?
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
